Filibuster Fight Rests With Bush

May 25, 2005|By Ronald Brownstein and Janet Hook Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — The fate of Monday's agreement defusing the Capitol Hill confrontation over judicial nominations now rests as much in the hands of President Bush as in those of the senators who crafted it.

The dramatic deal by a bipartisan group of 14 senators produced immediate results Tuesday -- the chamber voted to end a Democratic filibuster of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla R. Owen. Her long-stalled nomination to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals probably will be confirmed today.

Some who forged the deal expressed hope that the agreement would create momentum for compromise on other knotty issues, such as Social Security and immigration.

"Watch this group when it comes to major problems that the nation faces, like Social Security," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "I think we have created momentum for the idea that if you constructively engage each other, the political reward is high."

The group brokered a compromise in which seven Republicans agreed to oppose a Senate rule change to ban the filibuster, while seven Democrats agreed to use the procedural tool against judicial candidates only in "extraordinary circumstances." But the deal could prove short-lived if future judicial appointments provoke the same sort of partisan conflicts that erupted over the current nominees.

The agreement, both sides say, will face its greatest strain when a vacancy opens on the Supreme Court, perhaps as soon as this summer, when many expect ailing Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist to retire.

"The Supreme Court is probably where this comes to a head," said Gary Marx, executive director of the Judicial Confirmation Network, a conservative group supporting Bush's nominees.

If the president chooses a polarizing figure for the high court, the seven Democrats would face enormous pressure to support a filibuster, and that would instantly put pressure on the seven Republicans to reverse direction and back the filibuster ban.

Both Graham and Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, another of the deal's supporters, indicated Tuesday that they would support banning the filibuster if they felt any Democratic use of the tactic did not meet the "extraordinary circumstances" standard.

With the arrangement in such precarious balance, the critical factor may be Bush's reaction to the group's request that he consult more closely with senators of both parties on his judicial nominations, particularly on choices for the Supreme Court.

"It totally depends on Bush," said Ron Klain, who as deputy White House counsel and Justice Department chief of staff helped guide two Supreme Court nominations for President Clinton. "If Bush picks someone for the Supreme Court who is middle-of-the-road ... that person is going to get confirmed easily and then this agreement will hold. If Bush chooses a different course and picks someone of an ideological stripe like these more controversial appellate-court nominees, this agreement ... will unravel very shortly after that."

Few in either party disagreed with Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, a former Judiciary Committee chairman, when he declared Tuesday, "This is merely a truce; it's not a treaty."